Taxi leader says cyclists are the "Isis of London"

I'm minded of comedian Mark Steele's summary of UKIP voters 'people who think their whole life is someone else's fault'.

I just would not ride on open roads I london its sad and I'm sorry that I would be waving the white flag but Jesus it's unreal, chapaeu to people who do brave the idiots in the traffic there.

"In 2013, the LTDA used footage from a carefully-chosen junction to allege that 50 per cent of cyclists jump red lights, a finding completely at odds with more rigorous academic studies that have found the rate of red-light jumping of drivers and cyclists is about the same."

At the risk of starting a "compulsory helmets" style debate .... I know red-light jumping by cyclists is a hot button, but I honestly don't understand why.

A cyclist who fails to stop at a red light and causes an injury to another person should be prosecuted for doing so. For the most part, however, the only person that is likely to be injured when a cyclist fails to stop at a red light is the cyclist. (I admit to disregarding the effect on emergency service workers/cyclists' family/witnesses.) Contrast this with the position where a motor vehicle fails to stop at a red light. In those circumstances, motor vehicle just as likely to cause significant damage to other road users. This isn't a difference of degree, its a difference of kind, and to suggest otherwise is to force an artifical separatation between the act (running red light) and its actual/potential consequences (usually nothing/significant risk of injury).

The "but they run red lights" crowd appear to think that non-compliance by a small section of road users:

* excuses/mitigates their own non-compliance. The law doesn't work this way; and

* justifies retributive action against the wrongdoer. The law doesn't like vigilantes.

I suspect the vast majority of road users break the Highway Code every time they get into a car - driving (even marginally) over the speed limit being the most obvious example. I don't think this excuses me from complying with the HC nor do I feel it's my right to pursue all motorists and get all Judge Dredd on them.

The only question I would ask in response to a video that shows cyclists running red lights is "were any other road users hurt"; if the answer is "no", then I don't understand why it isn't greeted with a collective shrug of indifference.

(I would add that I don't care what running red lights does to the public perception of cyclists. Mostly "the public" is stupid. We are individuals riding bikes. My failure to stop at the occasional red lights doesn't mean that you won't stop every at red light you come across.)

Back on topic: I don't find cab drivers to be any worse than other drivers, in fact they are marginally better in my experience because they aren't in a hurry to get anywhere. Although I have a burn mark on my right Sidi where a cab got so close to me coming through the City that its front wheel was rubbing against my shoe.

I guess cab drivers would benefit greatly if London was a less safe city in which to ride a bicycle. Just sayin'.

Traffic pollution causes about 4000 deaths in London per year, Black cabs cause 30% of inner London's traffic pollution, so not 30% of 4000 but still a lot of deaths. Isis cause roughly zero deaths per year in London.

I'm not all that bothered by his comments. They are a bit tasteless given that the actual ISIS are currently out there killing people. [by which I mean, disrespectful to the actual victims of ISIS rather than to cyclists]

But its human nature that if you are in a fight and some of the 'other lot' say some nasty things about you or make stupid threats (I'm guessing some of that has happened, some cyclists out there have presumably said some extreme things about and to the LDTA) you will probably say something angry and stupid in response. And he's mostly retracted it anyway.

I'm more irritated by some of the posts here. These posters would, if the boot were on the other foot and a boss of a cycling campaign group had compared taxi-drivers to Nazis, be the first to go on and on about how this shows some cyclists are nutters 'their own worst enemy' etc etc. Instead they take this as yet another opportunity to attack cyclists and invoke the usual collective responsibility nonsense.

Some posters here just seem to identify entirely with the motorist lobby and never miss a trick to attack the straw-man idea that everyone who ever sits on a saddle is a saint, as if transport policy has anything to do with the morality of individual travellers.

And I'm bored of the ridiculous 'giving us a bad name' crap. I'm not responsible for other cyclists who might jump reds any more than every driver is responsible for all the other drivers who do it (and they do it _a lot_) or every pedestrian is responsible for all the pedestrians who mug people.

And even if every single cyclist somehow could be forced to behave perfectly via some bizarre cycling vigilantism, it wouldn't make any difference to our car-centric culture.

I despair...

Meanwhile,

Young restaurant 'rising star' hit by taxi and killed on night out with friends in east London

Teenager dies after being hit by taxi just after midnight on New Year's Day

That's two killer cabbies in the space of a few weeks. Never mind any serious injuries that might have gone unreported.

Steve McNamara might wish to re-evaluate that ISIS claim.

Personally I think his comments were Uber the top...

Mostly interesting comments, but nobody seems to have made the most pertinent point: How do I ensure that next time I visit London, I don't use a LTDA vehicle?

Alternatively, we have a metro system we affectionately call the 'tube' which will take you many places for less than black cabs. Also, if desperate, there are urban train lines, and even buses if you're really brave.

I wish all you cyclist in London would drive to work for a month.The taxi and bus companies would be begging you to get back on your bikes and would treat you much better

What a fucking idiot. I can picture the retarded fat prick now....

“Perhaps that was a bit strong [to compare them to Isis] but I can’t think of a single other movement in the world at the moment that behaves in such a vitriolic and aggressive manner.”

Whilst I don't condone the nasty threats, it doesn't surprise me, I've had punishment passes from London black cabs, some extremely dangerous and obviously deliberate. I've had a black cab squeeze into my lane and undertake me on a large roundabout. Most black cab drivers don't seem to know or care about what a safe passing distance is, being close-passed is mostly what makes cycling unpleasant in London. Perhaps if the LTDA addressed cabbies poor driving and didn't call equate cyclists to ISIS, there might not be such vitriol.

[quoute]“He told Evening Standard journalist Ross Lydall: “Perhaps I would accept that was a bit strong. It was a live interview. I have had death threats. They say, ‘I hope people you know die screaming of cancer’. I’m convinced that if 99 per cent of cyclists knew some of the stuff we had received after expresing legitimate concerns, they would be horrified.

“I’m not going to be intimidated. I don’t take them seriously. We have not reported anything to the police because I don’t think there is anything in them. I think it’s just a few loonies, but they really have got a sort of religious zeal.

“Perhaps that was a bit strong [to compare them to Isis] but I can’t think of a single other movement in the world at the moment that behaves in such a vitriolic and aggressive manner.”[/quote]

The reason his apology (of sorts)is completely disingenuous is apparent in the exact language he has used:

He states that he has received death threats and knows that 99% of cyclists would find that behaviour abhorent yet, goes on to say this framed in a VERY specific way:

Quote:

Perhaps that was a bit strong [to compare them to Isis] but I can’t think of a single other movement in the world at the moment that behaves in such a vitriolic and aggressive manner.

So he sees that all cyclists are collectively responsible for the actions of a few individuals, and so its quite fair to liken that movement to Daesh (I refuse to call that organisation what they want to be called but by the name that has been given to them by the French press).

Steve McNamara then, by his own measure is a rapist and he should shut his fucking rapist mouth.

That muppet only confirms my decision two years ago to stop using black cabs and Addison Lee was correct.

The apology was nothing of the sort. It's the current non-apology trotted out by the politicos all the time.

Sorry. Not sorry.

An apology means accepting the injury caused, taking responsibility for it, and a promise not to repeat it.

He simply re-stated the same accusation right after saying it 'may' have been going to far...

McNamara insulted every person on a bike twice, yet so many seem to think he apologised.

Which is why the non-apology remains in use...

The police doesn't use the word 'accident' anymore, as there's always a causative party. They use 'incident'. Stats show drivers of motor vehicles are fully responsible for incidents in the majority of cases.

Then, the newspaper articles have already brought the issue of the deaths caused by a vehicle smashing into those people out walking quite widely. That fact killed those people, and the vehicles were driven by taxi drivers. Those are facts.

Yes, I get it, you drive a taxi. You probably even drive it well, I hope you are very vocal with your colleagues about vulnerable road users and how motor vehicles are often used to intimidate, or kill through inattention or aggression?

I'll stop looking askance at taxi drivers when they stop yelling things like 'I'll run you over' when behind me, thanks very much. Some of them seem to have a problem with me existing, I have a problem with how they behave.

jacknorell:

the newspaper articles in question report the known facts and only those facts, which they know as professional reporters, will not be prejudicial to the on going enquiries that the police are making.

They do not use pejorative terms such as "Killer Cabbies" or "vehicle smashing into".

Such phrasing is insightful.

As to whether or not I am a London Taxi driver, well if I were, then according to some comments posted on Road.cc, I must be a fat, ill educated, unintelligent, bigotted, road menace, killer runt (quote). Would I admit to that in this inhospitable environment? Think what you like.

What I do admit to, is that I cycle and I drive.

As for abusive talk, it happens both ways. Whilst a motorist, ableit stationary in traffic, I have been verbally accosted by a man on a bike who claimed that he would find out where I lived and would then burn my house down whilst my wife and children slept. It still shocks me.

But then this is just another anecdote in the tit for tat verbal sparing that achieves nothing other than to illustrate that very point.

I would encourage all participants on this public platform, especially people like yourself with much experience in digital media/marketing, to promote cycling positevely, pursue safety progress, but to do so in a way that does not pigeon hole cyclists as aggressive, millitant, intolerant, fascists and Holier than thou.

Good luck and I wish you well.

Personally I like self interest organisations that have spokespeople that truly reflect the opinions of their members and who are dumb enough not to understand that their views may not be held by everyone.

Shows in public how little real concern they have beyond furthering their own. So much better than smooth PR in the foreground and corrosive counsel in hidden corridors.

So he says:
“Perhaps that was a bit strong [to compare them to Isis] but I can’t think of a single other movement in the world at the moment that behaves in such a vitriolic and aggressive manner.”
In other words, it might be a bit strong but I stand by it...what a cun7